3 ms·
probably the same can be said for any car company, any tech company, any company of sufficient size and most small companies too. looking at you Boeing!
by laweijfmvo 1y ago
probably the same can be said for any car company, any tech company, any company of sufficient size and most small companies too. looking at you Boeing!
- leakycap 1y agoWhat other examples could we look at? Boeing seems like low hanging fruit but as I try to think of other examples it is hard. I can't think of another transport/medical/safety related software leak that left the same kind of impression on me. I was somewhat considering a Tesla back then, but the source code stopped me from that idea.
- tim333 1y agoIt's interesting that the recent AI 171 crash may be software related. At least if looks so far that both engines were shut down at the same time which happened once before on a 787 due to the "Thrust Control Malfunction Accommodation" system. Time will tell.
- Zigurd 1y agoThere are high reliability providers of software for mission critical tasks. The egregiousness with which Tesla pursues, cowboy engineering is one reason why Green Hills, which makes mission critical RTOSs, CEO Dan O'Dowd has created demonstrations of the dangers of Tesla's software. There are standards for this type of software and there are products that meet those standards. Maybe we need different standards for software that's meant to blow something up versus software that avoids sudden energetic outcomes, but these aren't new problems and there's no excuse for not establishing, updating, and meeting standards.
- general1726 1y agoWell if you mean MCAS, then coding was not a main issue, but the fact that system expected 2 sensors to deduce malfunction while management decided to put there only 1 sensor and 2 only as a premium. Then MCAS system had no way how to deduce if 1 input sensor is sending correct data or garbage.